TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- 5 years of drug decriminalisation in Portugal
Pages (2): « 1 [2]
We don't ban alcohol because some people are alcoholics.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Capitalizt ... it is pretty damn harmless especially when you compare it with the most widely used legal drug, alcohol. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Clovis We don't ban alcohol because some people are alcoholics. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov It actually makes sense to me - if drugs are legal, there's no stigma attached to going to rehab for something illicit. Rehab becomes like an AA meeting - more or less mainstream. I imagine that more people that might need help would seek it out in such an environment. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Actually it's more because there are more that like alcohol that aren't alcoholics Remember alcoholics aren't just those that drink all the time you know... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJ Damerchi no, that's not the reason why alcohol is legal, at all. It is more addictive and destructive than Cannabis, mdma, lsd, psilcybin, GHB, Khat, alkyl nitrates, and on and on. I cannot stress how serious of a drug alcohol is. Your statement that alcoholics aren't necessarily those that drink all the time can be paralleled with any drug, because there will always be someone with a worse addiction. there are degrees of addiction man, not just yay or nay. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r I don't want to burst your bubble but you're preaching to the choir here. I understand totally what alcohol is and can do, not because of my experience with it, but being on the receiving end so many times. I've lost family members, have others that should be in AA and another that did and have been sober for over 5 yrs now. I've been to AA meetings myself just to see what goes on and to support my close family member. So yes, I know DJ Damerchi, exactly what you're saying and I agree with you 100%. My comment was a little more tongue in cheek (no thanks to the interpretive ability of the internet...) than you might have thought. I was poking fun at the fact that prohibition was tried once and it certainly wasn't because the alcoholics put up a sh%t-storm lol. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJ Damerchi Sorry for the losses bro, I feel you, I buried a good friend in his 20's last year. If that event were never to have happened I probably would not have been so Emo about alcoholism, its just that the drinking culture at my uni in Kingston really gets under my skin sometimes...and I had fully embraced it beforehand. I also see people heading down that path and that really worries me more than one could imagine. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo you're under the false impression that becoming and being an addict doesn't put anyone else under unnecessary burdens. maybe you've never been around addicts, maybe you have and just never paid it much attention but the fact remains - the burden of addiction will always become someone else's problem regardless of law. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r What shocked me the most about the AA meetings wasn't the meeting itself but the number of young people there. I was sadden but at the same time, encouraged that they took such a bold step and not let their own ego kill them. All I have to say is, hang in their D. Just be a friend and make sure your friends get home safe; that's what I did all through high school / college. That's not to say I didn't imbibe myself a little here and there and have a good time, but I always knew my limit because in the end, it really isn't worth it. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Krypton What is criminal about smoking weed or doing some other drug? The illegality of it doesn't stop the millions who engage in drug use. So why continue a failed policy focused on enforcement? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by secked To most hard drug addicts, availability of the product and personal expense are the only limitations. Take either of those away almost entirely and what happens? People who think this is an entirely black and white issue have never seen somebody dopesick before. |
Keeping people weened on $300 per week of dirt to shoot up their veins just isn't really what I would consider to be a step in the right direction - they're basically choosing one prison over another, and I don't care how much more 'free' people suppose this 'decision' to be.
You're completely right though, we need to think of something else other than this up-cliff battle against the apparent basic human need to dope oneself. Fear tactics don't work because people either know enough to ignore them or they don't know enough to know the truth about things until it comes time to smoke meth off a fucking car windshield.
People with substance addictions are sick and need help, not punishment or process through an already bloated internment system that can only help to add to people's need to escape reality. But is supplying people with what they want truly the resolution merely because the statistics indicate as such? I think you'd be a fool to eat that up.
What they need to do is boost the image of those that successfully reformed if for nothing else but to give hope.
Every AA meeting has a speaker who was either a reformed alcoholic and/or drug addict. It's for everyone's benefit who's at the meeting but especially for those that have never been to one before because it's those people that are thinking of making a change that need the most encouragement.
They need to put these types of people on a pedestal (if they're willing of course).
Hell, if Scientology can exploit celebrities for their own gain, why not have a few celebrities come out for a more righteous cause such as AA?
The only problem with this of course is that AA is very strict regarding their associations and representation.
IMHO I think they really should do this as apposed to the status quo.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.